Talk:Rowlf the Dog filmography
Format Questions Looking through the history on this page, I see there's been some back and forthing on the format of this page. For example, whether to include episode numbers and "all episodes." That's not how it's done on the other filmographies. Early on, when Kermit the Frog Filmography was getting out of hand, Danny rightly pointed out that there wasn't a whole lot to be gained by chronicling every Sesame Street episode which included a Kermit appearance. Personally, I think the same goes for Rowlf, especially with. And why is Rowlf's Sesame Street appearance in the Baker film leaping back and forth? It seems to be going from miscellaneous to TV shows and now to "appearances" (which otherwise includes guest spots on non-"Muppet" shows). In general, it seems that it's worth taking some time to discuss what the editors have in mind for this page, and try to reach a clearer consensus or at least understanding to avoid basically over-writing each other's edits. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC) *1) I think that, for the major characters, the Filmography should be limited with regard to episodes they appeared in. Listing them all just gets excessive. So I prefer linking to the episodes that Rowlf did not appear in. On the other filmographies, we note major appearances in parentheses next to the episodes the characters appeared in, which we obviously can't do if we don't list episodes. That's why, a bunch of edits back, I included Rowlf at the Piano and Appearances Backstage. It may seem like a bunch of "see also" subsections, but he's a major character on a major show, and I think it helps the filmography be more comprehensive. 2) I personally don't think "all episodes" is necessary. We can have a note at the top that says "unless otherwise noted..." 3) As for audio appearances, I think we can have separate lists for Audio Appearances and Book Appearances. 4) We don't differentiate on the minor filmographies, but I thought TV Shows was for Muppet/Henson TV shows, which would include Sesame Street, even if it is a cameo or guest appearance by a Muppet. That's why I put Rowlf's Baker Films appearance in Sesame Street and not in TV Appearances, which in every other category is Muppets appearing in non-Muppet/Henson productions. 5) I wouldn't include Baby Rowlf here either. He's got his own page and can have his own filmography on it. Not sure how to deal with the video games. Open to recommendations. 6) Also, these opinions hold for all Major Filmographies in case anyone thinks we should move this to the category talk page. -- Peter (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC) :I added some of the specific episode listings as I feel if we're are going to show favoritism and list the specific episodes for one show, then we should be uniform about it and specify his involvement in all of the TV shows. It does give a better idea of how big or small his role in that show was and when specifically he was used, but it is not necessary. It is a bit overkill to specify which of episodes of "The Jim Henson Hour" he was in (but then again on other character pages, like the Frackles or Droop, we do list each specific episode/sketch they were in so why not for Rowlf?). Dropping the specific episodes, I think, would be fine. If someone cares so much about if Rowlf was in an episode they can find the information quite easily on the show/episode pages. I don't like highlighting the reference to the Muppet Show episodes he wasn't in as a filmography should be a list of what he did do (not what he didn't do) - it would seem weird to highlight a list episodes of Muppets Tonight Rowlf was not in next to a list of Jim Henson Hour episodes he was in. Nor would his filmography have "TV specials Rowlf was not in". People should use this to see what Rowlf has been in, not have to deduce through what he hasn't. The list of Muppet Show episodes that major characters weren’t in is cool, but using in as a substitute for listing a character’s appearances seems odd (especially in the context of listing the actual appearances in other shows along side). ::As for the Sesame Street appearance. I have a hard time listing a one-time celebrity-like cameo as a TV Show role for Rowlf. He's wasn't a member of the Sesame Street cast (we don't categorize him as a “Sesame Street Character”). His role was very different in nature from the Jimmy Dean Show, The Muppet Show and even Muppets Tonight. His one minor appearance was that of a celebrity-like appearance in a non-Muppet insert film. I think it should be listed as an appearance (like how Big Bird being on The Muppet Show is listed like a guest spot on his filmography) or if wanted under miscellaneous for the fact he appeared in a “Henson Film” used on the show. ::I think the filmography should group things in relationship to Rowlf and his role in the production, not grouped based on their general relationship to Henson. This is Rowlf the Dog's Filmography - not just a listing of Henson productions that featured Rowlf. I also see this page (and the others) as a filmography for Rowlf the character, not just Rowlf the puppet (the Kermit Filmgrpahy lists Christmas Carol, but Bob Cratchet has his own page and listing the animated and vocal only content is usful in showing their life-span). It shows the popularity and heights of the character's career (in all forms). ::Also, I’d have to check the tapes but I think Rowlf (silently, in the background, and very briefly) was seen few other time in Muppets Tonight other than just the one time listed. ::I like the idea of audio and book appearances lists being separated from other things...but I think they can just be another heading on this page rather than new page(s). I also like the Backstage appearances, at the piano, and episodes not appeared in lists - but not up top in the list of shows...maybe at the bottom in a "see also" list but not mixed in with the grand list of things (they just seem awkward up there). -- Brad D. (talk) 20:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC) :::To tell the truth, I don't even like categorizing on the filmography pages. I prefer chronologically. Check out Rowlf the Dog Filmography Sandbox. :::As for the episodes he did/did not appear in, I prefer listing all the episodes when it's feasible (The Jim Henson Hour or Muppets Tonight). But for The Muppet Show, the list is very long. In that case, I think it helps to say that he appeared in all episodes except for...and then link to that list. Conversely, we could have a Rowlf the Dog Muppet Show Filmography that looks like the ones on the minor character pages, indicating on which sketches he appeared in every episode. Or we could just go ahead and put the whole dang list on the Filmography page. But in my opinion, the block of episode numbers doesn't really do any good. -- Peter (talk) 21:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC) ::::Oh, and I still don't think animated, book, or aural appearances belong in a Filmography. I'd prefer separate lists for those. -- Peter (talk) 21:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC) I like the ordered list by date (as you set up in the sandbox). It shows a more timelined look at his career and is less broken up and compartmentalized. But I think that for guest show type spots putting a qualifier that he was a guest (as to not imply a cast member or recurring role) such as: * The Ed Sullivan Show (1967) ... guest, October 8 I kind of like the listing out of each episode for TMS (although it is longer). Having a main bullet for "The Muppet Show: Season 1" and then each episode listed under it would be nice to divide it up amid the list. However the qualifying of which skits he was in inside parenthesis seems like overkill. We don't list the specific scenes or segments for each special/film/show. Listing out the details for each episode isn't really needed here in my mind. If someone wants to know his role in that production, just click the link to that show and you can find out what happened and who did what. I think that books and audio appearances should be different lists and not integrated into the current filmography, but I think we could just have those lists on the same page (just have sub-headings at the bottom for audio works and book appearances and list them in order). If the collective works of Rowlf is divided into 3-4 pages…and Kermit has 3-4 and Piggy, and Gonzo, and Fozzie, and Big Bird and... it could get out of hand we'd just end up with a lot of stuff to sort through when they could share one nice and neat page showcasing the collective works of Rowlf the Dog….but mainly focus on the film works. I just think his role in "A Green and Red Christmas" is just as significant (if not more so) to note than his 30-second of silent fame in Muppet Treasure Island. Also having a picture for each decade would be sweat. I also concede the Baby Rowlf stuff; we've established that Baby Rowlf is basically like a different character within his own universe and he can list his works on his page. I would also add a "See also" for the other lists of recurring sketches and stuff (like "did not appear in", "at the piano" "backstage appearances", " A Poem by Rowlf"….) -- Brad D. (talk) 00:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC) :While the chronological list is interesting, it's sort of an impenetrable mass of stuff to me since it doesn't indicate what his role was in each, and the intent of showing his career gets rather submerged. If that info were added as parantheticals (or subheadings under each decade??), it would help. At the moment I actually prefer the existing page, divided up by type of work, and I think the listing of all the "Muppet Show" episodes on it looks fine. I agree with whoever said it seems odd to list stuff he didn't do on a page about what he did do. (Actually I always think of him as being in every show simply because I like the closing credits so much but that's obviously not the way it's being defined.) To me, audio and books don't belong on a "filmography" for the simple reason that they aren't filmed. I don't see the problem with having a discography, a filmography, and a list of books separated out, but if they are to be combined then the page should be called "Rowlf the Dog Collected Works" or whatever... -- Wendy (talk) 04:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC) :::Here are some more playing around with format and listings Rowlf the Dog Filmography Sandbox 2 (everything listed out) and Rowlf the Dog Filmography Sandbox 3 (no specific episodes listed). -- Brad D. (talk) 05:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC) ::::I vote #3 for the sandbox versions. Listed out as in version #2 is too long. Listed out in a compact paragraph like on the original page is not so bad, but with the link on the bottom to the list of eps he "wasn't in", not strictly necessary. -- Wendy (talk) 05:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC) I've kind of come to feel that for the major characters listing out all the episodes is getting obsessive and is kind of worthless. For a minor character listing the 1-20 episodes they appeared in makes sence, but listing out all of Rowlf's (or Kermit's) episodes seems like information overload to a point of "who cares". If someone really wants to know which ones he was or wasn't in the information is out there. Its just getting overly trivial in detail. -- Brad D. (talk) 05:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC) :I agree that listing every episode gets burdensome, but so long as we link to the list of episodes he didn't appear in at the bottom of the page, I'm satisfied. I also prefer Sandbox 3, although I like the major heading ( 1960s ) as opposed to the minor headings ( 1960s ). I'm also in favor of eliminating the dates, except for guest appearances on talk shows and the like. The decade gives a general idea, the items are chronological, and the specific dates for film and/or special premieres will be on the individual pages. -- Peter (talk) 16:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC) :: Removing the years would be ok (although they do help keep things somewhat in order), but for guest spots adding the full date (month/day) in parenthesis could be nice.-- Brad D. (talk) 18:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC) :::My ony concern now is "Kermit", who's body of work is like no other character. Looking at his filmography (which is why we switched to sorting from production order to production type in the first place). He's done so much that it can become a big old mess because of the tons of commercials and guest spots just flood out everything. Take a look -- Kermit the Frog Filmography Sandbox. -- Brad D. (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC) :::I like having the years. It makes the organization transparent. I don't think it needs to have the dates for the guest-spots though. "Kermit" looks ok to me actually; it's interesting to see the clusters of guest spots around shows and such.-- Wendy (talk) (forgot to sign it - no timestamp) ::::I prefer Sandbox 3, but keeping major headings instead of minor headings for each decade. -- Peter (talk) 03:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC) :::::So is this the way we want to go? -- Brad D. (talk) 03:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC) ::::::I think it looks good. -- Wendy (talk) 04:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC) :Everyone who's participated in the debate so far seems to agree, so I'm going to switch Rowlf's over to the new form. If someone(s) want to work on Piggy's, Gonzo's, Kermit's, Fozzie's and Big Bird's filmographies to match this form -- by all means go ahead ('cause I'm not going to...or at least not any time soon). -- Brad D. (talk) 04:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)